VIEWS OF RIDERS IN WEST BERKS ON THE SPECIFICATION OF EQUESTRIAN BRIDGES. August 2003.

Background.

Having won the public inquiry in 2001/2 for an equestrian bridge over the A34, a few of us started to worry about the what the specifications of the bridge might be. That is, what height would the parapets be? Would the sides be solid? What would the surface be?

We went to the first public meeting at Chieveley in July 2003 and voiced our concerns to the Highways Agency and the Costain Project Manager. We were told that we would be consulted and asked for our opinions. Well, that made us think that we had better give this some serious thought! As so often happens, we could criticise what exists already but could we come up with something better……???

At about the same time, an article appeared in the BHS magazine 'Tracks' (available from the BHS, £15 for 3 issues) written by the RABO for Leicestershire, Vicky Allen. She described her and other riders' views of bridges used by horses and asked for other riders' opinions in different parts of the country. There are no agreed national specifications approved by the Highways Agency but an advice note is to be written based on what is 'buildable' and riders' views.

So, an email was sent out in early August 2003 to West Berks riders for their opinions on equestrian bridges with respect to parapet height, parapet infill and the bridge/ramp surface and any other comments they would like to make. Riders were told that the specification of a recently constructed bridleway bridge over the A34 is a parapet height of 1.8 metres with an infill of 600mm and a tarmac surface.

Results

The detailed results are given in the table below but the main conclusions were:

• 80% of riders commented on the height of parapets and wanted the parapets to be higher than 1.8metres.
• 90% of riders commented on the parapet infill and wanted the infill to be significantly more than 600mm.
• 70% of riders commented on the surface and wanted it to be non-slip.

So what now?

Firstly, our views, along with Vicky Allen's article (which worried about the same things as we did), have been sent to the Costain Project Manager and the engineers who are currently designing the bridge. We have been invited to meet the engineers along with Suzanne Hopes from West Berks Council Rights of way dept (who fought the public inquiry with us and pulled out all the stops by calling a traffic expert and landscape consultant witnesses) sometime in the autumn.

Secondly, our small survey is to be published in an article in the BHS Tracks magazine. We wait to see whether the views of West Berks riders are the same as other riders elsewhere.

So, thanks to the 10 of you who responded. Higher numbers would have been nice but as we only had a circulation list of just over 20 at the time, that is an excellent response rate.

Additional comments

• a: One rider commented: 1.5 metres infill because that will be at roughly the horse's eye height. This will avoid a feeling of claustrophobia which full infill might give but will avoid the feeling that the traffic below is going to hit the horse.
• b: made by a solicitor
• c: The A34 bridge will be readily accessible from the service area - measures should be taken to stop missiles being thrown over the side - therefore sides should not be wire mesh
• In addition, one carriage driver responded who was happy with the 1.8 m parapets & 600mm infill and any surface. This may be perhaps that carriage drivers are not as high up as riders and/ordriving horses are more steady than many riding horses. However, at present, the bridge has not been designed for carriage drivers.
• Height of parapet required is related to width of the bridge. The narrower the bridge, the higher the parapet required to be safe. On road bridges with 2 carriageways, riders tend to ride in the middle of their carriageway or in the middle of the road to keep away from the low parapets.
• With road bridges used by equestrians it should be obligatory to put up horse warning signs for motorists.
• The A34 bridleway bridge will be a long bridge so higher parapets & infill should be provided than normal.

JCB 16 Sep 03